11 ms·

Firefox 30.0

278 points by 01Michael10 12y ago

scott_karana 12y ago
Wow, I'm surprisingly stoked about this change: Use of line-height allowed for <input type="reset|button|submit"> Firefox was the only browser who didn't allow you do that!
- achisholm 12y ago
  Yup. The same goes for dropdown list '<select>' elements. No mention of that in this release though.
  - bzbarsky 12y ago
    That's https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=454625 https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=454625 and the problem is that other browsers only sometimes allow changing line-height on them and some sites are depending on that (non-documented, not standardized) behavior...
easytiger 12y ago
So I guess minor updates are how we do things now.
- scott_karana 12y ago
  Firefox has been doing rapid releases since April 2011 or so, it's not a recent thing. :) https://wiki.mozilla.org/RapidRelease https://wiki.mozilla.org/RapidRelease
  - easytiger 12y ago
    I wasn't criticising. I just noticed from the changelog for this release in particular was pretty close to "changed whitespace in code"
- sp332 12y ago
  Yup! Release early, release often. Linux (kernel), Gnome, Ubuntu, Firefox, and Chrome (and lots more) are all on scheduled updates. Edit: The advantage to rapid releases is that you can roll out minor updates when they're ready without having to wait for big ones, and you don't have to rush big ones for a deadline. If you miss one release, it's no a big deal because there's another one coming right up. Release when it's ready!
  - TheLoneWolfling 12y ago
    Rapid releases != rapid major version number increments. If you update the major version number too often it becomes meaningless. The Linux kernel is on version 3.15, for example.
    - sp332 12y ago
      Yes, it is meaningless, and they intentionally hide the version number now - the download page doesn't even show it. But what could a major version number mean? GNU Emacs was on version 1.x for so long they dropped the leading "1." and promoted the minor version number to the major version. Ubuntu just numbers their releases after the date, e.g. 12.04 came out in April 2012.
      - TheLoneWolfling 12y ago
        Quote from Wikipedia that expresses my viewpoint on the subject: > In principle [...] the major number is increased when there are significant jumps in functionality such as changing the framework which could cause incompatibility with interfacing systems, the minor number is incremented when only minor features or significant fixes have been added, and the revision number is incremented when minor bugs are fixed.
      - chimeracoder 12y ago
        > GNU Emacs was on version 1.x for so long they dropped the leading "1." and promoted the minor version number to the major version. As did Java. Java 1.4 was released in 2002, and the next version was Java 5 in 2006.
cauterize 12y ago
Does it strike anyone else as odd that they don't highlight security updates as Chrome does? Example, http://googlechromereleases.blogspot.com/2014/05/stable-channel-update_20.html http://googlechromereleases.blogspot.com/2014/05/stable-chan... Maybe it's psychological, but I like the reassurance security is a focus for Chrome.
- higherpurpose 12y ago
  Maybe because it doesn't seem to be their main priority (where's my sandbox at?): http://www.extremetech.com/computing/178587-firefox-is-still-the-least-secure-web-browser-falls-to-four-zero-day-exploits-at-pwn2own http://www.extremetech.com/computing/178587-firefox-is-still...
  - pix64 12y ago
    https://wiki.mozilla.org/Electrolysis https://wiki.mozilla.org/Electrolysis > The two major advantages of this model are security and performance. Security would improve because the content processes could be sandboxed (although sandboxing the content processes is a separate project from Electrolysis). Sandboxing Bug: https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=925570 https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=925570
- st3fan 12y ago
  You can see the security advisories here: https://www.mozilla.org/security/announce/ https://www.mozilla.org/security/announce/
  - pix64 12y ago
    http://www.mozilla.org/security/known-vulnerabilities/firefox.html http://www.mozilla.org/security/known-vulnerabilities/firefo...
benjaminpv 12y ago
Based on the notes in #812695[1] the longstanding text-corruption bug that's appeared in past releases should be fixed thanks to a change in how the layout's handled. [1]: https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=812695#c414 https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=812695#c414
deleted 12y ago
[deleted]
leorocky 12y ago
Firefox is getting more awesome with each update, but admittedly I'm kind of liking Chrome's implement first, standardize later approach to new features, which is why you can get a directoryReader in Chrome and drag and drop support for uploading entire directories. I wish Firefox had that, but it's not a standard so they're not implementing it.
- hansjorg 12y ago
  Mozilla is doing the same. Take a look at the WebAPI overview for some examples: https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/WebAPI https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/WebAPI
  - leorocky 12y ago
    True, but just as a note, that page also includes APIs available in Chrome and not Firefox, including directoryReader: https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/API/DirectoryReader https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/API/DirectoryRe...
- kibwen 12y ago
  Both Chrome and Firefox have the same approach of implementing first, standardizing later. For example, Firefox has had large swaths of ES6 implemented since 2006 or so. Rather, it's not so much that they refuse to implement features until they're standardized, it's that each browser maker refuses to implement the features dreamed up by the other browser makers until they're standardized.
  - leorocky 12y ago
    > Both Chrome and Firefox have the same approach of implementing first, standardizing later >Rather, it's not so much that they refuse to implement features until they're standardized, it's that each browser maker refuses to implement the features dreamed up by the other browser makers until they're standardized. I guess that's what happened with this. A Mozilla engineer explicitly argued against implementing something because it's not a standard in this issue: https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=782233 https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=782233
creatio 12y ago
Anyone know if array comprehensions are also supported in chrome?
- pit 12y ago
  var xs = 1, 2, 3 [for (x of xs) x * 2] SyntaxError: Unexpected token for Chrome Version 35.0.1916.114
- cpeterso 12y ago
  Not yet. Looks like only Firefox 30+ supports array and generator comprehensions: http://kangax.github.io/compat-table/es6/#Array_comprehensions http://kangax.github.io/compat-table/es6/#Array_comprehensio...
xkarga00 12y ago
This Firefox is already running bug is really annoying. I love Firefox but it's some poor UX when i manually have to shutdown the process.
- TazeTSchnitzel 12y ago
  Right, it should force-kill the existing process or something.
  - gedrap 12y ago
    Well, it shouldn't do that automatically, as you might just genuinely try to run FF while it's running by mistake. But a button to do kill would be nice.
    - DSMan195276 12y ago
      Running FF a second time works actually, all it does is signal to the current running FireFox to open a new window in the same process. The 'FF is already running' message comes-up when there is a zombie FF process going that's not responding to signals to open a window (or similar). I agree with you though, killing it off automatically isn't a very good solution, but having a button to close the current FF and restart would be nice.
    - pbhjpbhj 12y ago
      If you click on the button/ launch the application it should make a best effort to show you a browser window. "Restore" a minimised window, raise a hidden window, offer to restart if necessary, etc..
- 01Michael10 12y ago
  I wonder why this only seems to be a problem for some people... It has happened to me only once in the 1000's of times I have shutdown Firefox since version 29.
  - xkarga00 12y ago
notjustanymike 12y ago
Would it really be so hard to support a calendar? http://robertnyman.com/html5/forms/input-types.html http://robertnyman.com/html5/forms/input-types.html
- spankalee 12y ago
  I feel like a calendar input should probably be a custom element. There are too many possible variations.
  - kencausey 12y ago
    I upvoted and tend to agree with you but I wonder if 90% of uses couldn't be addressed through a relatively small (hah!) amount of CSS customizability of the element.
    - Sharlin 12y ago
      Probably, if you only want to support the en-us locale. Of course, in the real world that's not 90% of use cases...
  - _1 12y ago
    It's nice when a touch device can display an appropriate calendar selector. Even if the selector is barebones, it's nice to not have something you know will work, rather than to wonder through a gallery of the latest calendar widgets and then get disappointed that it's written for an incompatible framework.
  - Karellen 12y ago
    "too many possible variations" sounds like a reason to me to have the browser support it - to add cross-site consistency to the element. Once you know how the calendar on your OS/browser works, you know how the calendar on all the websites works. Also, adding accessibility for those with visual problems is a job to be performed once, by browser implementors, and can be completely ignored (at least for wrt calendars) by everyone who ever writes a website. Learning keyboard shortcuts becomes worthwhile (or even just possible). Overlaying the events from your personal calendar, say when hovering over a date, would make it possible to easily pick dates that coincide with (or avoid) the holidays associated with your particular culture - which your OS knows about, but J. Random Website doesn't - without leaving your browser. (Not all cultural holidays are as easily predictable 8 months in advance as Dec 25! Think of those based on lunar calendars, e.g. Easter) Heck, I find it annoying when websites want to use custom drop-down lists or buttons. The drop-downs and buttons that my OS provides are beautiful, thanks very much, and easily recognisable to boot. I know just by looking at the page where the controls are and how they're going to act. If I want them to look and act differently, I can change that in one place, in my OS settings, and the controls all change in a totally consistent manner for every website ever written, except those that try to be clever and break my setup instead. I can't believe I've heard some people complain that they thought that the standard controls are "too ugly". Well, get a prettier browser/theme/OS then!
JoshTriplett 12y ago
I love the change to prohibit non-whitelisted plugins. Together with the changes to Chrome to move away from NPAPI, hopefully we can kill off the majority of plugins across all browsers. If we can get it down to just Flash and nothing else, hopefully a few years from now Mozilla's HTML5 implementation of Flash will take off (similar to PDF.js), which pushes Flash inside the browser sandbox, and ensures that it has no more privileges or capabilities than normal in-browser content.
- bad_user 12y ago
  Even Flash I keep it on click to play. Doesn't bother me much, except when I want to view YouTube videos and such and I don't watch videos all day.
  - carlob 12y ago
    ClickToPlugin on Safari is reeeeally good at finding the html5 alternative for Flash videos. It's actually the only thing that's keeping me on Safari, if only someone could port it to firefox…
    - Spittie 12y ago
      Greasemonkey + ViewTube (http://isebaro.com/viewtube/?ln=en http://isebaro.com/viewtube/?ln=en) + ViewTube Plus (https://openuserjs.org/scripts/hamsterbacke/ViewTubePlus https://openuserjs.org/scripts/hamsterbacke/ViewTubePlus).
      - carlob 12y ago
        I tried those already, but It just won't work as consistently and as easily.
  - JoshTriplett 12y ago
    Between the HTML5 player and youtube-dl, I don't need Flash for YouTube at all, and I haven't noticed its absence in years.
  - 12y ago
bluthru 12y ago
CSS scale transition performance is still janky on OS X. Are they ever going to fix that?
- muizelaar 12y ago
  Do you have an example of this?
  - bluthru 12y ago
    https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=847653 https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=847653 It should hiccup on Firefox for Mac but virtually no other browser: http://jsfiddle.net/K7Ukb/8/ http://jsfiddle.net/K7Ukb/8/
- st3fan 12y ago
  Please post a link to a site where you see that happening.
  - bluthru 12y ago
    https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=847653 https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=847653 It should hiccup on Firefox for Mac but virtually no other browser: http://jsfiddle.net/K7Ukb/8/ http://jsfiddle.net/K7Ukb/8/
    - JohnBooty 12y ago
      FWIW: On a 2011 MBP 17", it was silky smooth in Chrome, and very slightly slightly less smooth on FF and Safari.
      - vxNsr 12y ago
        Chrome is fast and smooth, IE doesn't do anything. but this is Win7.
AtomicOrbital 12y ago
Why limit yourself to just firefox 30.0 I'm using their Mozilla Nightly currently at 33.0a1 (2014-06-10)
- st3fan 12y ago
  Awesome! We can always use more people using the Nightly or Beta channels. Just be aware that you are not getting production quality code. In general Nightly has been very stable for me, but sometimes things sneak in that are annoying or simply broken. If you can live with that, then welcome to Nightly! :-)
  - dfc 12y ago
    The only time I ever have problems with nightly is the first release of a new version. I wish I could set a config entry to wait for the second release of a new version.
    - Groxx 12y ago
      That might be considered the beta branch :)
    - enigmango 12y ago
      The Aurora release channel might be what you're looking for - it's between the beta and nightly channels. I find it to be exciting and fairly stable. http://www.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/channel/#aurora http://www.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/channel/#aurora
  - johnny22 12y ago
    i'd love to use nightly, but they don't enable gstreamer 1.0 by default yet.
- zanny 12y ago
  I run Arch on most of my machines. It seems kind of contradictory to say this, but I like my official repo updated in system upgrades standard firefox, whereas all the other channels are in either third party repos or the AUR.
huhtenberg 12y ago
Very nice, but those designer tabs from FF29 still make my eyes bleed every time I see them, so I'm stuck on FF28. I wonder how many people are in the same situation :-|
- steanne 12y ago
  classic theme restorer extension.
  - krill 12y ago
    not the same.
    - StuffMaster 12y ago
      Seamonkey.
- TheLoneWolfling 12y ago
  Switched to Pale Moon, haven't looked back. And a bonus of actually having a 64 bit build for my Windows partition without having to run Nightly.
  - JohnTHaller 12y ago
    Unfortunately, Pale Moon is significantly slower than Firefox due to it being based on the outdated ESR branch. See: http://portableapps.com/node/39509 http://portableapps.com/node/39509
    - TheLoneWolfling 12y ago
      It hasn't been notably slower for me. And it's rather notably more lightweight in terms of RAM usage.
    - hga 12y ago
      Pale Moon, 24.5, Linux 32 bit, running on Debian squeeze 32 bit, on my system, is dramatically faster than Firefox 29.0.1. Or rather, the latter is dramatically slower than 28.0, just about unusably slow. And this is true with a very minimum installation and usage, Session Manager and Track Package the only extensions, a version of Shockwave Flash auto installed the only plugin. As little as 3 windows with 7 tabs. And it might just be my impression, but Pale Moon might have been faster than Firefox 28.0. Have you tried the two side by side?
gedrap 12y ago
While it's quite off topic, what's with FF version numbers? I mean just a few years back it was FF 3, 4, 5, and while I am not using it daily, I don't think it's a major change every time. I guess my kids are going to use Firefox 142...
- rjv 12y ago
  Mozilla adopted a rapid release cycle, similar to what Google does with Chrome. Everyone is always automatically updated and version numbers are less significant.
- sp332 12y ago
  As scott_karana mentioned, Firefox has been doing "rapid release" since 2011. https://wiki.mozilla.org/RapidRelease https://wiki.mozilla.org/RapidRelease There are 3 channels: Aurora (alpha), Beta, and Release. Every 6 weeks, stable features are pushed into the next channel. So there is a new release every 6 weeks, and if you want to live in the future, you can use the Beta or Aurora channel. https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/channel/ https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/channel/ Edit: do you really want your grandkids to be stuck with version 5? :)
  - nchapman 12y ago
    And don't forget about nightly: http://nightly.mozilla.org/ http://nightly.mozilla.org/
    - Excavator 12y ago
      And the news-feed: http://firefoxnightly.tumblr.com/ http://firefoxnightly.tumblr.com/
- deleted 12y ago
  [deleted]
- 01Michael10 12y ago
  Holy crap! I so need the power of the down-vote right now... Update - Really? I am being down-voted and not gedrap?
ToastyMallows 12y ago
> Ignore autocomplete="off" when offering to save passwords via the password manager Love this change. There's some good conversations in Bugzilla about it. [0] [0]: https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=956906 https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=956906
- sdfjkl 12y ago
  That's one less script in my Greasemonkey.
- araes 12y ago
  This has been one of my most reviled features of the modern web that autocomplete is almost universally turned off for passwords. This often even extends to integrated password managers. Could not be happier this has been changed, although for most of my life I'll still suffer behind an ESR version without it. As one of the comments in the discussion notes, also possibly better for security. Manual entry is a negative incentive for complex passwords (reduces average complexity across the whole userbase). It also preferences keylogger attacks, which is one of the most widespread computer infections.
  - Kiro 12y ago
    Why ESR?
    - JohnTHaller 12y ago
      Probably what's being forced on them at work. That's generally the only place ESR is used. It's actually all it's meant for (large scale corporate/organization rollouts where they need to test and peg a specific version for use with web apps). Though you can have Firefox ESR installed and use it as your primary while still having a copy of Firefox Portable handy for other user on a flash drive or even right in My Documents.
    - insertnickname 12y ago
      I use it to avoid Australis (but still getting security updates).
3rd3 12y ago
I'm still eagerly waiting for per tab volume control [0], a per tab activity monitor/profiler [1], the possibility to suspend tabs with practically no memory usage [2] and more options for searching the browsing history [3]. Besides that I find it counterintuitive that a revisit of an URL removes the entry of the previous visit. The result is an incomplete history. I wished they would change that. [0]: https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=728046 https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=728046 [1]: https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=400120 https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=400120 [2]: https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=675539 https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=675539 There are add-ons for suspending tabs but in my experience not very robust ones [3]: Full text search and search operators for time intervals would be great.
- zanny 12y ago
  I know it isn't necessarily the same, but volume controllers on Linux using Pulseaudio have per-source volume meters. I use them to turn off annoying banners and such.
- kevingadd 12y ago
  I don't think tab volume control is trivial; NPAPI doesn't provide an audio API. So Flash on Win32 (for example) is just sending audio directly to the OS. (You can use the Windows volume controller to adjust Flash volume, at least.)
- pcwalton 12y ago
  Per tab volume control is impossible with NPAPI. Unless Adobe does something, Shumway has to be the solution for that.
  - icebraining 12y ago
    Technically, they could set LD_LIBRARY_PATH (or equivalent in Windows) and provide a sound API wrapper library that could control the volume. That sounds overkill, though.
    - 12y ago
deleted 12y ago
[deleted]
Siecje 12y ago
Why in the inspector does it convert the markup to xml? So it adds < / input > etc
- ahoge 12y ago
  It's a sort-of serialized representation of the DOM.
  - Siecje 12y ago
    I thought </input> was the proper way to write HTML.
    - ahoge 12y ago
      It's either <input ...> (SGML flavor) or <input .../> (XML flavor).
shmerl 12y ago
Unfortunately no gstreamer 1.0 in official Mozilla builds yet.
- dblohm7 12y ago
  It's item #3 in the release notes. http://www.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/30.0/releasenotes/ http://www.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/30.0/releasenotes/
  - shmerl 12y ago
    It's available as an option at build time (build switch). But it's not used in the official Mozilla builds which are still built against gstreamer 0.10.
cozuya 12y ago
This is my favorite firefox specific "bug", still around in 30 I would guess: http://jsfiddle.net/rk7ke/ http://jsfiddle.net/rk7ke/ Works fine in literally all other browsers. Oh well.
- boobsbr 12y ago
  nope, doesn't work in Chromium 36.
  - cozuya 12y ago
    I stand corrected!
  - unstabilo 12y ago
    Nor in Opera 12.
- vxNsr 12y ago
  What's supposed to happen?
  - scrabble 12y ago
    The wrong slash has been used in the URL. It's supposed to be a broken image.
  - JohnTHaller 12y ago
    There's an invalid URI within the IMG starting with http:\\ instead of http:// http://. A mistake a beginner designer who's used to Windows directories would make. Some browsers like IE helpfully 'fix' this mistake and accept it so the beginner designers have no idea they're writing broken code. Other browsers like Firefox interpret it as written and show it as broken.
    - vxNsr 12y ago
      Hmm, with Chrome in W8 it shows an image, So I didn't see anything wrong...
mantrax5 12y ago
It was only yesterday when Firefox was 3 and look at it now. Isn't it about time we start telling it to get married and have children or?
skrowl 12y ago
Best browser just keeps getting better! Hopefully this gets some more people over from the closed-source Google Chrome.
jonaldomo 12y ago
Am I only one who thinks it is crazy that all the web browsers look the same now? http://jmoses.co/2014/06/10/which-browser-is-which.html http://jmoses.co/2014/06/10/which-browser-is-which.html
- hnriot 12y ago
  at least 50% of those images is the same web page!
- toxican 12y ago
  It's irritating. I keep Chrome and Firefox both installed so I can test sites on them and it's not until I go to use an addon or Firebug that I realize I somehow ended up using Chrome as my browser for the day rather than my usual favorite Firefox.
- sp332 12y ago
  It's like asking "why are all these blank sheets of paper so similar?" Browsers are getting more minimal because browser chrome just gets in the way of the content. Anyway they're not that similar. Firefox has a search bar, refresh button on the right, and no greyed-out "forward" button. Opera has the speed dial buttons. And Chrome would be the most "minimal" if it weren't for the extension icons over on the right.
- r00fus 12y ago
  Design convergence? Perhaps it's what is commonly understood as "what users want" on a windowed desktop OS... perhaps we need to look to new UI inputs/frameworks (mobile, voice) to break out of the current mold?
- gooble_flop 12y ago
  It's crazy. Why don't they differentiate themselves like in the good old days? http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/c/c5/Internet_Explorer_3_on_Windows_95.png http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/c/c5/Internet_Explo... http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/9/93/Netscape_Navigator.png http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/9/93/Netscape_Navig... Oh wait...
- 12y ago
aleksandrm 12y ago
I love Firefox, but since I upgraded from 28 to 29, it has been crashing for me on Win 7 on a daily basis. Looking in about:crashes I have close to 30 crashes reported. The moment I upgraded to 30, it crashed. sigh
- johnny22 12y ago
  do you happen to have the extension HTTPS Everywhere installed? I had that problem and disabled the SSL Observatory and it started working fine again. Hopefully it will be fixed soon (if not already)
  - aleksandrm 12y ago
    Yes, I have HTTPS Everywhere installed. I will disable SSL Observatory and see if that helps. Thanks for the tip.
  - haakon 12y ago
    This seems to have solved it for me, finally! Thanks a lot.
- YokoZar 12y ago
  You're not alone. I went years and years having Firefox never crash without an obvious reason (like a problematic page or plugin), but recently I've been having it crash once a day or so even with all plugins/addons disabled.
  - bzbarsky 12y ago
    Would you mind linking to one of those crash reports? If you would rather not do that in public, please feel free to e-mail me links: bzbarsky at mit dot edu.
- olavgg 12y ago
  Same problem here, daily crashes. This started with Firefox 28 and I still have this problem with Firefox 30. I have no idea why, but some pages crash more often than others. This happened on both OSX and Ubuntu(my laptop and workstation) at the same time when Firefox 28 was introduced.
arenaninja 12y ago
There seems to be a bug on the dev-tools in the Network tabs, I cannot see the labels that are normally at the bottom ("All | HTML | CSS ... "). It seems that the container that's wrapping them doesn't have enough height to show the text. This is on OS X 10.9.3. Anyone else having this issue?
darkhorn 12y ago
There is a telephone in Firefox Nightly.
kent13304 12y ago
I've uninstalled Firefox since Mozilla ousted Brandon Eich
- varkson 12y ago
  Sorry to here you hate homosexuals.
throwq 12y ago
Still no keyring/OS password storage support? I'm all for storing all passwords in the password manager (including those with autocomplete="off") but anything that can read signons.sqlite has access to all passwords in cleartext (no average user uses the master password)
- tkinom 12y ago
  Are you sure? I just did a .dump on my signons.sqlite. The login and passwords are not stored in cleartext. ubuntu 13.10 firefox 27.0.1

278 points by 01Michael10 12y ago

Wow, I'm surprisingly stoked about this change: Use of line-height allowed for <input type="reset|button|submit"> Firefox was the only browser who didn't allow you do that!

achisholm 12y ago
Yup. The same goes for dropdown list '<select>' elements. No mention of that in this release though.
- bzbarsky 12y ago
  That's https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=454625 https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=454625 and the problem is that other browsers only sometimes allow changing line-height on them and some sites are depending on that (non-documented, not standardized) behavior...

easytiger 12y ago

So I guess minor updates are how we do things now.

scott_karana 12y ago
Firefox has been doing rapid releases since April 2011 or so, it's not a recent thing. :) https://wiki.mozilla.org/RapidRelease https://wiki.mozilla.org/RapidRelease
- easytiger 12y ago
  I wasn't criticising. I just noticed from the changelog for this release in particular was pretty close to "changed whitespace in code"
sp332 12y ago
Yup! Release early, release often. Linux (kernel), Gnome, Ubuntu, Firefox, and Chrome (and lots more) are all on scheduled updates. Edit: The advantage to rapid releases is that you can roll out minor updates when they're ready without having to wait for big ones, and you don't have to rush big ones for a deadline. If you miss one release, it's no a big deal because there's another one coming right up. Release when it's ready!
- TheLoneWolfling 12y ago
  Rapid releases != rapid major version number increments. If you update the major version number too often it becomes meaningless. The Linux kernel is on version 3.15, for example.
  - sp332 12y ago
    Yes, it is meaningless, and they intentionally hide the version number now - the download page doesn't even show it. But what could a major version number mean? GNU Emacs was on version 1.x for so long they dropped the leading "1." and promoted the minor version number to the major version. Ubuntu just numbers their releases after the date, e.g. 12.04 came out in April 2012.
    - TheLoneWolfling 12y ago
      Quote from Wikipedia that expresses my viewpoint on the subject: > In principle [...] the major number is increased when there are significant jumps in functionality such as changing the framework which could cause incompatibility with interfacing systems, the minor number is incremented when only minor features or significant fixes have been added, and the revision number is incremented when minor bugs are fixed.
    - chimeracoder 12y ago
      > GNU Emacs was on version 1.x for so long they dropped the leading "1." and promoted the minor version number to the major version. As did Java. Java 1.4 was released in 2002, and the next version was Java 5 in 2006.

cauterize 12y ago

Does it strike anyone else as odd that they don't highlight security updates as Chrome does? Example, http://googlechromereleases.blogspot.com/2014/05/stable-channel-update_20.html http://googlechromereleases.blogspot.com/2014/05/stable-chan... Maybe it's psychological, but I like the reassurance security is a focus for Chrome.

higherpurpose 12y ago
Maybe because it doesn't seem to be their main priority (where's my sandbox at?): http://www.extremetech.com/computing/178587-firefox-is-still-the-least-secure-web-browser-falls-to-four-zero-day-exploits-at-pwn2own http://www.extremetech.com/computing/178587-firefox-is-still...
- pix64 12y ago
  https://wiki.mozilla.org/Electrolysis https://wiki.mozilla.org/Electrolysis > The two major advantages of this model are security and performance. Security would improve because the content processes could be sandboxed (although sandboxing the content processes is a separate project from Electrolysis). Sandboxing Bug: https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=925570 https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=925570
st3fan 12y ago
You can see the security advisories here: https://www.mozilla.org/security/announce/ https://www.mozilla.org/security/announce/
- pix64 12y ago
  http://www.mozilla.org/security/known-vulnerabilities/firefox.html http://www.mozilla.org/security/known-vulnerabilities/firefo...

benjaminpv 12y ago

Based on the notes in #812695[1] the longstanding text-corruption bug that's appeared in past releases should be fixed thanks to a change in how the layout's handled. [1]: https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=812695#c414 https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=812695#c414

deleted 12y ago

[deleted]

leorocky 12y ago

Firefox is getting more awesome with each update, but admittedly I'm kind of liking Chrome's implement first, standardize later approach to new features, which is why you can get a directoryReader in Chrome and drag and drop support for uploading entire directories. I wish Firefox had that, but it's not a standard so they're not implementing it.

hansjorg 12y ago
Mozilla is doing the same. Take a look at the WebAPI overview for some examples: https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/WebAPI https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/WebAPI
- leorocky 12y ago
  True, but just as a note, that page also includes APIs available in Chrome and not Firefox, including directoryReader: https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/API/DirectoryReader https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/API/DirectoryRe...
kibwen 12y ago
Both Chrome and Firefox have the same approach of implementing first, standardizing later. For example, Firefox has had large swaths of ES6 implemented since 2006 or so. Rather, it's not so much that they refuse to implement features until they're standardized, it's that each browser maker refuses to implement the features dreamed up by the other browser makers until they're standardized.
- leorocky 12y ago
  > Both Chrome and Firefox have the same approach of implementing first, standardizing later >Rather, it's not so much that they refuse to implement features until they're standardized, it's that each browser maker refuses to implement the features dreamed up by the other browser makers until they're standardized. I guess that's what happened with this. A Mozilla engineer explicitly argued against implementing something because it's not a standard in this issue: https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=782233 https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=782233

creatio 12y ago

Anyone know if array comprehensions are also supported in chrome?

pit 12y ago
var xs = 1, 2, 3 [for (x of xs) x * 2] SyntaxError: Unexpected token for Chrome Version 35.0.1916.114
cpeterso 12y ago
Not yet. Looks like only Firefox 30+ supports array and generator comprehensions: http://kangax.github.io/compat-table/es6/#Array_comprehensions http://kangax.github.io/compat-table/es6/#Array_comprehensio...

xkarga00 12y ago

This Firefox is already running bug is really annoying. I love Firefox but it's some poor UX when i manually have to shutdown the process.

TazeTSchnitzel 12y ago
Right, it should force-kill the existing process or something.
- gedrap 12y ago
  Well, it shouldn't do that automatically, as you might just genuinely try to run FF while it's running by mistake. But a button to do kill would be nice.
  - DSMan195276 12y ago
    Running FF a second time works actually, all it does is signal to the current running FireFox to open a new window in the same process. The 'FF is already running' message comes-up when there is a zombie FF process going that's not responding to signals to open a window (or similar). I agree with you though, killing it off automatically isn't a very good solution, but having a button to close the current FF and restart would be nice.
  - pbhjpbhj 12y ago
    If you click on the button/ launch the application it should make a best effort to show you a browser window. "Restore" a minimised window, raise a hidden window, offer to restart if necessary, etc..
01Michael10 12y ago
I wonder why this only seems to be a problem for some people... It has happened to me only once in the 1000's of times I have shutdown Firefox since version 29.
- xkarga00 12y ago

notjustanymike 12y ago

Would it really be so hard to support a calendar? http://robertnyman.com/html5/forms/input-types.html http://robertnyman.com/html5/forms/input-types.html

spankalee 12y ago
I feel like a calendar input should probably be a custom element. There are too many possible variations.
- kencausey 12y ago
  I upvoted and tend to agree with you but I wonder if 90% of uses couldn't be addressed through a relatively small (hah!) amount of CSS customizability of the element.
  - Sharlin 12y ago
    Probably, if you only want to support the en-us locale. Of course, in the real world that's not 90% of use cases...
- _1 12y ago
  It's nice when a touch device can display an appropriate calendar selector. Even if the selector is barebones, it's nice to not have something you know will work, rather than to wonder through a gallery of the latest calendar widgets and then get disappointed that it's written for an incompatible framework.
- Karellen 12y ago
  "too many possible variations" sounds like a reason to me to have the browser support it - to add cross-site consistency to the element. Once you know how the calendar on your OS/browser works, you know how the calendar on all the websites works. Also, adding accessibility for those with visual problems is a job to be performed once, by browser implementors, and can be completely ignored (at least for wrt calendars) by everyone who ever writes a website. Learning keyboard shortcuts becomes worthwhile (or even just possible). Overlaying the events from your personal calendar, say when hovering over a date, would make it possible to easily pick dates that coincide with (or avoid) the holidays associated with your particular culture - which your OS knows about, but J. Random Website doesn't - without leaving your browser. (Not all cultural holidays are as easily predictable 8 months in advance as Dec 25! Think of those based on lunar calendars, e.g. Easter) Heck, I find it annoying when websites want to use custom drop-down lists or buttons. The drop-downs and buttons that my OS provides are beautiful, thanks very much, and easily recognisable to boot. I know just by looking at the page where the controls are and how they're going to act. If I want them to look and act differently, I can change that in one place, in my OS settings, and the controls all change in a totally consistent manner for every website ever written, except those that try to be clever and break my setup instead. I can't believe I've heard some people complain that they thought that the standard controls are "too ugly". Well, get a prettier browser/theme/OS then!

JoshTriplett 12y ago

I love the change to prohibit non-whitelisted plugins. Together with the changes to Chrome to move away from NPAPI, hopefully we can kill off the majority of plugins across all browsers. If we can get it down to just Flash and nothing else, hopefully a few years from now Mozilla's HTML5 implementation of Flash will take off (similar to PDF.js), which pushes Flash inside the browser sandbox, and ensures that it has no more privileges or capabilities than normal in-browser content.

bad_user 12y ago
Even Flash I keep it on click to play. Doesn't bother me much, except when I want to view YouTube videos and such and I don't watch videos all day.
- carlob 12y ago
  ClickToPlugin on Safari is reeeeally good at finding the html5 alternative for Flash videos. It's actually the only thing that's keeping me on Safari, if only someone could port it to firefox…
  - Spittie 12y ago
    Greasemonkey + ViewTube (http://isebaro.com/viewtube/?ln=en http://isebaro.com/viewtube/?ln=en) + ViewTube Plus (https://openuserjs.org/scripts/hamsterbacke/ViewTubePlus https://openuserjs.org/scripts/hamsterbacke/ViewTubePlus).
    - carlob 12y ago
      I tried those already, but It just won't work as consistently and as easily.
- JoshTriplett 12y ago
  Between the HTML5 player and youtube-dl, I don't need Flash for YouTube at all, and I haven't noticed its absence in years.
- 12y ago

bluthru 12y ago

CSS scale transition performance is still janky on OS X. Are they ever going to fix that?

muizelaar 12y ago
Do you have an example of this?
- bluthru 12y ago
  https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=847653 https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=847653 It should hiccup on Firefox for Mac but virtually no other browser: http://jsfiddle.net/K7Ukb/8/ http://jsfiddle.net/K7Ukb/8/
st3fan 12y ago
Please post a link to a site where you see that happening.
- bluthru 12y ago
  https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=847653 https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=847653 It should hiccup on Firefox for Mac but virtually no other browser: http://jsfiddle.net/K7Ukb/8/ http://jsfiddle.net/K7Ukb/8/
  - JohnBooty 12y ago
    FWIW: On a 2011 MBP 17", it was silky smooth in Chrome, and very slightly slightly less smooth on FF and Safari.
    - vxNsr 12y ago
      Chrome is fast and smooth, IE doesn't do anything. but this is Win7.

AtomicOrbital 12y ago

Why limit yourself to just firefox 30.0 I'm using their Mozilla Nightly currently at 33.0a1 (2014-06-10)

st3fan 12y ago
Awesome! We can always use more people using the Nightly or Beta channels. Just be aware that you are not getting production quality code. In general Nightly has been very stable for me, but sometimes things sneak in that are annoying or simply broken. If you can live with that, then welcome to Nightly! :-)
- dfc 12y ago
  The only time I ever have problems with nightly is the first release of a new version. I wish I could set a config entry to wait for the second release of a new version.
  - Groxx 12y ago
    That might be considered the beta branch :)
  - enigmango 12y ago
    The Aurora release channel might be what you're looking for - it's between the beta and nightly channels. I find it to be exciting and fairly stable. http://www.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/channel/#aurora http://www.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/channel/#aurora
- johnny22 12y ago
  i'd love to use nightly, but they don't enable gstreamer 1.0 by default yet.
zanny 12y ago
I run Arch on most of my machines. It seems kind of contradictory to say this, but I like my official repo updated in system upgrades standard firefox, whereas all the other channels are in either third party repos or the AUR.

huhtenberg 12y ago

Very nice, but those designer tabs from FF29 still make my eyes bleed every time I see them, so I'm stuck on FF28. I wonder how many people are in the same situation :-|

steanne 12y ago
classic theme restorer extension.
- krill 12y ago
  not the same.
  - StuffMaster 12y ago
    Seamonkey.
TheLoneWolfling 12y ago
Switched to Pale Moon, haven't looked back. And a bonus of actually having a 64 bit build for my Windows partition without having to run Nightly.
- JohnTHaller 12y ago
  Unfortunately, Pale Moon is significantly slower than Firefox due to it being based on the outdated ESR branch. See: http://portableapps.com/node/39509 http://portableapps.com/node/39509
  - TheLoneWolfling 12y ago
    It hasn't been notably slower for me. And it's rather notably more lightweight in terms of RAM usage.
  - hga 12y ago
    Pale Moon, 24.5, Linux 32 bit, running on Debian squeeze 32 bit, on my system, is dramatically faster than Firefox 29.0.1. Or rather, the latter is dramatically slower than 28.0, just about unusably slow. And this is true with a very minimum installation and usage, Session Manager and Track Package the only extensions, a version of Shockwave Flash auto installed the only plugin. As little as 3 windows with 7 tabs. And it might just be my impression, but Pale Moon might have been faster than Firefox 28.0. Have you tried the two side by side?

gedrap 12y ago

While it's quite off topic, what's with FF version numbers? I mean just a few years back it was FF 3, 4, 5, and while I am not using it daily, I don't think it's a major change every time. I guess my kids are going to use Firefox 142...

rjv 12y ago
Mozilla adopted a rapid release cycle, similar to what Google does with Chrome. Everyone is always automatically updated and version numbers are less significant.
sp332 12y ago
As scott_karana mentioned, Firefox has been doing "rapid release" since 2011. https://wiki.mozilla.org/RapidRelease https://wiki.mozilla.org/RapidRelease There are 3 channels: Aurora (alpha), Beta, and Release. Every 6 weeks, stable features are pushed into the next channel. So there is a new release every 6 weeks, and if you want to live in the future, you can use the Beta or Aurora channel. https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/channel/ https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/channel/ Edit: do you really want your grandkids to be stuck with version 5? :)
- nchapman 12y ago
  And don't forget about nightly: http://nightly.mozilla.org/ http://nightly.mozilla.org/
  - Excavator 12y ago
    And the news-feed: http://firefoxnightly.tumblr.com/ http://firefoxnightly.tumblr.com/
deleted 12y ago
[deleted]
01Michael10 12y ago
Holy crap! I so need the power of the down-vote right now... Update - Really? I am being down-voted and not gedrap?

ToastyMallows 12y ago

> Ignore autocomplete="off" when offering to save passwords via the password manager Love this change. There's some good conversations in Bugzilla about it. [0] [0]: https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=956906 https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=956906

sdfjkl 12y ago
That's one less script in my Greasemonkey.
araes 12y ago
This has been one of my most reviled features of the modern web that autocomplete is almost universally turned off for passwords. This often even extends to integrated password managers. Could not be happier this has been changed, although for most of my life I'll still suffer behind an ESR version without it. As one of the comments in the discussion notes, also possibly better for security. Manual entry is a negative incentive for complex passwords (reduces average complexity across the whole userbase). It also preferences keylogger attacks, which is one of the most widespread computer infections.
- Kiro 12y ago
  Why ESR?
  - JohnTHaller 12y ago
    Probably what's being forced on them at work. That's generally the only place ESR is used. It's actually all it's meant for (large scale corporate/organization rollouts where they need to test and peg a specific version for use with web apps). Though you can have Firefox ESR installed and use it as your primary while still having a copy of Firefox Portable handy for other user on a flash drive or even right in My Documents.
  - insertnickname 12y ago
    I use it to avoid Australis (but still getting security updates).

3rd3 12y ago

I'm still eagerly waiting for per tab volume control [0], a per tab activity monitor/profiler [1], the possibility to suspend tabs with practically no memory usage [2] and more options for searching the browsing history [3]. Besides that I find it counterintuitive that a revisit of an URL removes the entry of the previous visit. The result is an incomplete history. I wished they would change that. [0]: https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=728046 https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=728046 [1]: https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=400120 https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=400120 [2]: https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=675539 https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=675539 There are add-ons for suspending tabs but in my experience not very robust ones [3]: Full text search and search operators for time intervals would be great.

zanny 12y ago
I know it isn't necessarily the same, but volume controllers on Linux using Pulseaudio have per-source volume meters. I use them to turn off annoying banners and such.
kevingadd 12y ago
I don't think tab volume control is trivial; NPAPI doesn't provide an audio API. So Flash on Win32 (for example) is just sending audio directly to the OS. (You can use the Windows volume controller to adjust Flash volume, at least.)
pcwalton 12y ago
Per tab volume control is impossible with NPAPI. Unless Adobe does something, Shumway has to be the solution for that.
- icebraining 12y ago
  Technically, they could set LD_LIBRARY_PATH (or equivalent in Windows) and provide a sound API wrapper library that could control the volume. That sounds overkill, though.
  - 12y ago

deleted 12y ago

[deleted]

Siecje 12y ago

Why in the inspector does it convert the markup to xml? So it adds < / input > etc

ahoge 12y ago
It's a sort-of serialized representation of the DOM.
- Siecje 12y ago
  I thought </input> was the proper way to write HTML.
  - ahoge 12y ago
    It's either <input ...> (SGML flavor) or <input .../> (XML flavor).

shmerl 12y ago

Unfortunately no gstreamer 1.0 in official Mozilla builds yet.

dblohm7 12y ago
It's item #3 in the release notes. http://www.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/30.0/releasenotes/ http://www.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/30.0/releasenotes/
- shmerl 12y ago
  It's available as an option at build time (build switch). But it's not used in the official Mozilla builds which are still built against gstreamer 0.10.

cozuya 12y ago

This is my favorite firefox specific "bug", still around in 30 I would guess: http://jsfiddle.net/rk7ke/ http://jsfiddle.net/rk7ke/ Works fine in literally all other browsers. Oh well.

boobsbr 12y ago
nope, doesn't work in Chromium 36.
- cozuya 12y ago
  I stand corrected!
- unstabilo 12y ago
  Nor in Opera 12.
vxNsr 12y ago
What's supposed to happen?
- scrabble 12y ago
  The wrong slash has been used in the URL. It's supposed to be a broken image.
- JohnTHaller 12y ago
  There's an invalid URI within the IMG starting with http:\\ instead of http:// http://. A mistake a beginner designer who's used to Windows directories would make. Some browsers like IE helpfully 'fix' this mistake and accept it so the beginner designers have no idea they're writing broken code. Other browsers like Firefox interpret it as written and show it as broken.
  - vxNsr 12y ago
    Hmm, with Chrome in W8 it shows an image, So I didn't see anything wrong...

mantrax5 12y ago

It was only yesterday when Firefox was 3 and look at it now. Isn't it about time we start telling it to get married and have children or?

skrowl 12y ago

Best browser just keeps getting better! Hopefully this gets some more people over from the closed-source Google Chrome.

jonaldomo 12y ago

Am I only one who thinks it is crazy that all the web browsers look the same now? http://jmoses.co/2014/06/10/which-browser-is-which.html http://jmoses.co/2014/06/10/which-browser-is-which.html

hnriot 12y ago
at least 50% of those images is the same web page!
toxican 12y ago
It's irritating. I keep Chrome and Firefox both installed so I can test sites on them and it's not until I go to use an addon or Firebug that I realize I somehow ended up using Chrome as my browser for the day rather than my usual favorite Firefox.
sp332 12y ago
It's like asking "why are all these blank sheets of paper so similar?" Browsers are getting more minimal because browser chrome just gets in the way of the content. Anyway they're not that similar. Firefox has a search bar, refresh button on the right, and no greyed-out "forward" button. Opera has the speed dial buttons. And Chrome would be the most "minimal" if it weren't for the extension icons over on the right.
r00fus 12y ago
Design convergence? Perhaps it's what is commonly understood as "what users want" on a windowed desktop OS... perhaps we need to look to new UI inputs/frameworks (mobile, voice) to break out of the current mold?
gooble_flop 12y ago
It's crazy. Why don't they differentiate themselves like in the good old days? http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/c/c5/Internet_Explorer_3_on_Windows_95.png http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/c/c5/Internet_Explo... http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/9/93/Netscape_Navigator.png http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/9/93/Netscape_Navig... Oh wait...
12y ago

aleksandrm 12y ago

I love Firefox, but since I upgraded from 28 to 29, it has been crashing for me on Win 7 on a daily basis. Looking in about:crashes I have close to 30 crashes reported. The moment I upgraded to 30, it crashed. sigh

johnny22 12y ago
do you happen to have the extension HTTPS Everywhere installed? I had that problem and disabled the SSL Observatory and it started working fine again. Hopefully it will be fixed soon (if not already)
- aleksandrm 12y ago
  Yes, I have HTTPS Everywhere installed. I will disable SSL Observatory and see if that helps. Thanks for the tip.
- haakon 12y ago
  This seems to have solved it for me, finally! Thanks a lot.
YokoZar 12y ago
You're not alone. I went years and years having Firefox never crash without an obvious reason (like a problematic page or plugin), but recently I've been having it crash once a day or so even with all plugins/addons disabled.
- bzbarsky 12y ago
  Would you mind linking to one of those crash reports? If you would rather not do that in public, please feel free to e-mail me links: bzbarsky at mit dot edu.
olavgg 12y ago
Same problem here, daily crashes. This started with Firefox 28 and I still have this problem with Firefox 30. I have no idea why, but some pages crash more often than others. This happened on both OSX and Ubuntu(my laptop and workstation) at the same time when Firefox 28 was introduced.

arenaninja 12y ago

There seems to be a bug on the dev-tools in the Network tabs, I cannot see the labels that are normally at the bottom ("All | HTML | CSS ... "). It seems that the container that's wrapping them doesn't have enough height to show the text. This is on OS X 10.9.3. Anyone else having this issue?

darkhorn 12y ago

There is a telephone in Firefox Nightly.

kent13304 12y ago

I've uninstalled Firefox since Mozilla ousted Brandon Eich

varkson 12y ago
Sorry to here you hate homosexuals.

throwq 12y ago

Still no keyring/OS password storage support? I'm all for storing all passwords in the password manager (including those with autocomplete="off") but anything that can read signons.sqlite has access to all passwords in cleartext (no average user uses the master password)

tkinom 12y ago
Are you sure? I just did a .dump on my signons.sqlite. The login and passwords are not stored in cleartext. ubuntu 13.10 firefox 27.0.1